Helen H. Moore's Blog, page 1002
August 27, 2015
Scott Walker’s hostile waters: The destruction of Wisconsin’s universities damages more than the liberal academic elite
If you’re from Wisconsin, the Friday night fish fry is a big deal, and the fish you want on your plate is a yellow perch you caught yourself. But for years, the population of yellow perch has been in serious decline. Now on the verge of collapse, the future of this iconic fish is looking grim. Kind of like what is happening right now with the faculty at the University of Wisconsin, under siege from a legislative agenda that has been steadily decimating its numbers while pretending that the loss doesn’t matter and hey, maybe it’s even a good thing! Why do you care, anyways? It’s just stupid fish. There are always more of them. Anti-intellectuals may yell “good riddance!” at the exodus of top-tier talent, but it’s the yellow perch paying the ultimate price for Gov. Scott Walker’s political actions. Ever since Walker began gutting the university system—cutting $250 million in funding from the UW system (while mysteriously finding $250 million in state funds to pay for a new stadium for the Milwaukee Bucks); weakening a once-prized system of shared governance; and passing a new law effectively turning tenure into a tool of a Board of Regents consisting almost entirely of political appointees -- the star faculty found itself being poached, starting with senior professors such as the fish guy, Rick Goetz. He was a lead researcher at what is now called the School of Freshwater Sciences at Wisconsin-Milwaukee, where he studied the yellow perch. He left for NOAA, taking his grant money with him. Just like that, the wild fish lost the top guy working on their behalf. Fish night will never be the same. Stop whining. One fish is just as good as another. Who cares about the “ancient mating habits of whatever”? (The words in quotes were actually spoken by an Wisconsin assemblyman dismissively waving away faculty protesting against budget cuts.) The Yellow Perch doesn’t appear on the 2015 Wisconsin fishing calendar from Game and Fish magazine. Try walleye, or smallies! There are loads of other fish to fry! But the Yellow Perch was the “fish of the people” because it was abundant and delicious. It also used to generate annual state revenues in the millions. Its loss isn't just symbolic, it's economic. At the School of Freshwater Sciences, professor and senior scientist Sandra McLellan routinely pulls in half a million dollars annually in outside funding. Despite the constant political framing of professors as bloviating liberal leeches, the reality is far more complex. On the flagship campus at Madison, for example, 30 percent of the total university budget is covered by outside funding brought in by the faculty. In 2009, Madison faculty brought in one billion dollars of external funding, even as the university community contributed billions more to the annual state economy. (In 2015, it was $15.4 billion.) Funding for McLellan’s research on freshwater resources comes from a combination of government and private grants, and she estimates that this money is mostly used to fund students and create jobs. “75 percent manpower, 25 percent supplies,” she says. It’s not just professors whose jobs are being threatened, but administrative assistants, tech support, and a whole host of other necessary staff members. Working class people depend on universities for their livelihoods too. “With our new open border policy, we will welcome all university workers from the beleaguered state of Wisconsin,” the Yes Men (a performance artist collective) declared with big fake smiles on their businesslike faces. In an Orwellian satire of the corporatization of the University of Iowa, the Yes Men’s “Efficiency Review”—a parody of what is happening in reality-- called for “improvements” such as an “Academic Fast Pass” for students willing to pay for access to better grades, and that all teachers and administrators should be renamed “Content Delivery Specialists.” Though satirical, their suggestions aren’t all that far from their current reality at Iowa, “where department chairs are already called “Department Executive Officers,” and a state senator introduced a bill that would automatically fire teachers that students disliked, followed by a Survivor-style vote-off for those hovering too close to the edge. “I’ve never seen morale this bad, and I’ve been here since ’96,” Milwaukee professor Lane Hall told me, pointing to a “profound state of distrust” now permeating every aspect of the institution. Some are staying to swim against the political tide, but the signal word is demoralized. By decimating a budget already so thin that the faculty, Hall says, hasn’t had a cost-of-living raise in ten years, every task is infused with a sense of profound futility. What is happening in Wisconsin is happening everywhere; it is a little parable of working in America. But as far as public university education is concerned, Wisconsin’s demise has shattered any remaining illusions that the destruction of the American university isn’t merely underway--it is nearly complete. Yesterday, professor Chuck Rybak threw down the gauntlet, and called for fellow faculty at Wisconsin to stop going through the motions and ditch the tenure file. He writes:
“Tenure no longer exists in Wisconsin. We have entered the era of pretendure. The only moral thing to do, right now, is abolish the tenure file. If the reward for compiling the file no longer exists, then the file should no longer exist.”By pointing out that tenure has become “pretendure,” Rybak is staking a rhetorical claim to combat political theater. His position is not altogether wrong. Though tenure still formally exists, it has been hollowed out and rendered toothless. Tenure is too often mistaken for a sinecure, i.e. a job in name only, whereas its true function is to protect intellectual freedom for those whose work challenges prevailing power structures. Given that in April 2015, a gag order was placed on the entire staff of the Wisconsin Board of Commissioners of Public Lands, forbidding them from “working on or even talking about climate change on state time,” it is not inconceivable that an atmospheric scientist at Madison could be summarily fired simply for collecting data measuring the earth’s temperature. Already, recruitment is suffering. It so happens that the same term "recruiting" applies both to the nurturing of game fish as well as to coaxing the best and brightest minds to join a university community. Both types of recruits need years to develop, that slowness itself an anachronism in a world that breeds farm animals to reach market maturity in months. To sportsmen, the yellow perch was never known for its fight, but for its exceptional flavor. If it can't mature properly, it's no good to anyone. But as the big fish depart Wisconsin, never to return, there are no new recruits to replace the growing void. Those that are left, floundering in hostile waters, will find it nearly impossible to grow to their full potential, leaving a bad taste in bitter mouths. “This is the way the world ends,” wrote T.S. Eliot, “not with a bang, but with a whimper.” But it won’t matter in Wisconsin, because nobody will be left to teach this useless thing called poetry, and those words are gibberish. Want to go fishing for smallies?
Spike Lee’s dubious honor: Is the Honorary Oscar a way for the Academy to say “this is as close as you’ll ever get?”
Recently, director Spike Lee got some good news: In November, he will receive an Honorary Oscar at the Governors Award thrown by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. Previous winners include heavy hitting filmmakers – Fellini, Kurosawa, Orson Welles -- and the Academy’s president, Cheryl Boone Isaacs, praises the work of Lee and two other to be honored that day as driven by “passion, dedication and a desire to make a positive difference” which “will also enrich future generations.” Wow – it doesn’t get any better than that. And Lee will collect his Oscar alongside actresses Gena Rowlands and Debbie Reynolds. (The latter receives a Jean Hersholt Humanitarian Award.) But as we squint at this a little bit, this triumph looks a little less unalloyed. There was a time when the Honorary Oscar went to a wide range of figures; Shirley Temple landed one when she was still a child. But lately, the award has been given to figures who’ve been, uh, out of the action for a while. If you’re got new movies coming out, which could win you a best directors or best actor award, why do you need to be in a special “honorary” category? Over the last few years, Honorary Oscars have gone to Eli Wallach (born 1915), Angela Lansbury (1925), Maureen O’Hara (1920), and D.A. Pennebaker (1925.) Serious talents, all, but not folks with terribly busy cinematic schedules by the time of their awards. The relative spring chicken Hayao Miyazaki won a well-deserved honorary Oscar in 2014 – after the Japanese animator announced his retirement. Rowlands, by the way, is 85; Reynolds, 83. Lee is 58 and presumably has a couple of decades at least of output left. So what’s going on here? It would be easy to think that this was a well-meaning but paternalistic way a body that has recently been exposed for its racial homogeneity would recognize a black filmmaker. That’s probably part of the story. But most likely, the incongruity here has as much to do with attitude and taste -- and his status as a defiant New Yorker who refuses to play the Hollywood game -- as with race. Lee has been nominated for an Oscar only twice – for best original screenplay for “Do the Right Thing” and best documentary feature for the church-bombing chronicle, “4 Little Girls.” The second of those nominations came 18 years ago. So the lifetime achievement award may be the Academy’s back-handed way of apologizing: Look, we respect what you do – in theory -- and people tell us you are a talented guy. And we really want someone kinda edgy like you at the table. But this is as close as you’re gonna get. In the Academy’s defense, Lee’s work has been eccentric and unpredictable for a long time, and he doesn’t churn out a steady diet of Oscar bait. But “The Original Kings of Comedy” (a concert film about four black stand-up comedians) and “When the Levee Broke” (a documentary about the New Orleans flood) and “Passing Strange” (the film version of Stew’s rock musical about a young man’s search for his artistic identity) are hardly obscure or inaccessible: The fact that these, and the rest of Lee’s output since 1998, have failed to earn him even a nomination shows that something is wrong with this picture. It’s tempting to compare Lee’s honorary Oscar to the 2011 award given to James Earl Jones (born 1931). But a closer parallel may be to Godard, who was offered an Honorary Oscar in 2010. Godard, for his part, never came to Hollywood to collect his statue, and said at the time that the honor meant “nothing” to him. “If the Academy likes to do it, let them do it,” the French New Wave instigator said. “But I think it’s strange. I asked myself: Which of my films have they seen? Do they actually know my films?” Is Lee as far from the Hollywood mainstream as 21st century Godard? Probably not. But given Lee’s tradition of provocative statements, we’ll be curious to see where this one goes.Recently, director Spike Lee got some good news: In November, he will receive an Honorary Oscar at the Governors Award thrown by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. Previous winners include heavy hitting filmmakers – Fellini, Kurosawa, Orson Welles -- and the Academy’s president, Cheryl Boone Isaacs, praises the work of Lee and two other to be honored that day as driven by “passion, dedication and a desire to make a positive difference” which “will also enrich future generations.” Wow – it doesn’t get any better than that. And Lee will collect his Oscar alongside actresses Gena Rowlands and Debbie Reynolds. (The latter receives a Jean Hersholt Humanitarian Award.) But as we squint at this a little bit, this triumph looks a little less unalloyed. There was a time when the Honorary Oscar went to a wide range of figures; Shirley Temple landed one when she was still a child. But lately, the award has been given to figures who’ve been, uh, out of the action for a while. If you’re got new movies coming out, which could win you a best directors or best actor award, why do you need to be in a special “honorary” category? Over the last few years, Honorary Oscars have gone to Eli Wallach (born 1915), Angela Lansbury (1925), Maureen O’Hara (1920), and D.A. Pennebaker (1925.) Serious talents, all, but not folks with terribly busy cinematic schedules by the time of their awards. The relative spring chicken Hayao Miyazaki won a well-deserved honorary Oscar in 2014 – after the Japanese animator announced his retirement. Rowlands, by the way, is 85; Reynolds, 83. Lee is 58 and presumably has a couple of decades at least of output left. So what’s going on here? It would be easy to think that this was a well-meaning but paternalistic way a body that has recently been exposed for its racial homogeneity would recognize a black filmmaker. That’s probably part of the story. But most likely, the incongruity here has as much to do with attitude and taste -- and his status as a defiant New Yorker who refuses to play the Hollywood game -- as with race. Lee has been nominated for an Oscar only twice – for best original screenplay for “Do the Right Thing” and best documentary feature for the church-bombing chronicle, “4 Little Girls.” The second of those nominations came 18 years ago. So the lifetime achievement award may be the Academy’s back-handed way of apologizing: Look, we respect what you do – in theory -- and people tell us you are a talented guy. And we really want someone kinda edgy like you at the table. But this is as close as you’re gonna get. In the Academy’s defense, Lee’s work has been eccentric and unpredictable for a long time, and he doesn’t churn out a steady diet of Oscar bait. But “The Original Kings of Comedy” (a concert film about four black stand-up comedians) and “When the Levee Broke” (a documentary about the New Orleans flood) and “Passing Strange” (the film version of Stew’s rock musical about a young man’s search for his artistic identity) are hardly obscure or inaccessible: The fact that these, and the rest of Lee’s output since 1998, have failed to earn him even a nomination shows that something is wrong with this picture. It’s tempting to compare Lee’s honorary Oscar to the 2011 award given to James Earl Jones (born 1931). But a closer parallel may be to Godard, who was offered an Honorary Oscar in 2010. Godard, for his part, never came to Hollywood to collect his statue, and said at the time that the honor meant “nothing” to him. “If the Academy likes to do it, let them do it,” the French New Wave instigator said. “But I think it’s strange. I asked myself: Which of my films have they seen? Do they actually know my films?” Is Lee as far from the Hollywood mainstream as 21st century Godard? Probably not. But given Lee’s tradition of provocative statements, we’ll be curious to see where this one goes.
Donald Trump loved Miley Cyrus’ #TwerkGate
In one of the creepier-sounding phone calls in recorded history, Donald Trump apparently called Miley Cyrus to congratulate her personally after her scandalous, twerk-filled performance at the 2013 VMAs. As Cyrus explained in a recent Times interview, "I was staying at the Trump Hotel and Donald Trump literally called and said, basically, 'I know everyone’s talking about it, but I loved it.' I had no idea anyone was talking about it yet.” (Good rule of thumb -- if Donald Trump loves your performance, the rest of the world likely finds it problematic). Later in the interview, Cyrus turns to another controversial topic: Nicki Minaj’s recent criticism that the VMAs unduly favors white artists. After trying unsuccessfully to avoid weighing in (even though she clearly really wanted to weigh in), Cyrus chastised Minaj for the way she addressed the issue. As she put it, " If you do things with an open heart and you come at things with love, you would be heard and I would respect your statement. I don’t respect your statement because of the anger that came with it.” Instead of turning to the bigger issues, Cyrus claims, Minaj made it ‘about her.’ Or as she put it: "Not to sound like a bitch, but that’s like, 'Eh, I didn’t get my V.M.A.’” "If you want to make it about race, there’s a way you could do that,” she continued. “But don’t make it just about yourself. Say: 'This is the reason why I think it’s important to be nominated. There’s girls everywhere with this body type.’” When interviewer Joe Coscarelli pointed out that Minaj did in fact say that, Cyrus’ criticisms grew even more pointed:
"What I read sounded very Nicki Minaj, which, if you know Nicki Minaj is not too kind. It’s not very polite. I think there’s a way you speak to people with openness and love. You don’t have to start this pop star against pop star war. It became Nicki Minaj and Taylor in a fight, so now the story isn’t even on what you wanted it to be about. Now you’ve just given E! News 'Catfight! Taylor and Nicki Go at It.’ I know you can make it seem like, Oh I just don’t understand because I’m a white pop star. I know the statistics. I know what’s going on in the world. But to be honest, I don’t think MTV did that on purpose."Read the full interview -- which concludes with Cyrus admitting she has no idea what videos are nominated, because she doesn’t really listen to music or watch TV, cause whatever -- over at the Times.In one of the creepier-sounding phone calls in recorded history, Donald Trump apparently called Miley Cyrus to congratulate her personally after her scandalous, twerk-filled performance at the 2013 VMAs. As Cyrus explained in a recent Times interview, "I was staying at the Trump Hotel and Donald Trump literally called and said, basically, 'I know everyone’s talking about it, but I loved it.' I had no idea anyone was talking about it yet.” (Good rule of thumb -- if Donald Trump loves your performance, the rest of the world likely finds it problematic). Later in the interview, Cyrus turns to another controversial topic: Nicki Minaj’s recent criticism that the VMAs unduly favors white artists. After trying unsuccessfully to avoid weighing in (even though she clearly really wanted to weigh in), Cyrus chastised Minaj for the way she addressed the issue. As she put it, " If you do things with an open heart and you come at things with love, you would be heard and I would respect your statement. I don’t respect your statement because of the anger that came with it.” Instead of turning to the bigger issues, Cyrus claims, Minaj made it ‘about her.’ Or as she put it: "Not to sound like a bitch, but that’s like, 'Eh, I didn’t get my V.M.A.’” "If you want to make it about race, there’s a way you could do that,” she continued. “But don’t make it just about yourself. Say: 'This is the reason why I think it’s important to be nominated. There’s girls everywhere with this body type.’” When interviewer Joe Coscarelli pointed out that Minaj did in fact say that, Cyrus’ criticisms grew even more pointed:
"What I read sounded very Nicki Minaj, which, if you know Nicki Minaj is not too kind. It’s not very polite. I think there’s a way you speak to people with openness and love. You don’t have to start this pop star against pop star war. It became Nicki Minaj and Taylor in a fight, so now the story isn’t even on what you wanted it to be about. Now you’ve just given E! News 'Catfight! Taylor and Nicki Go at It.’ I know you can make it seem like, Oh I just don’t understand because I’m a white pop star. I know the statistics. I know what’s going on in the world. But to be honest, I don’t think MTV did that on purpose."Read the full interview -- which concludes with Cyrus admitting she has no idea what videos are nominated, because she doesn’t really listen to music or watch TV, cause whatever -- over at the Times.In one of the creepier-sounding phone calls in recorded history, Donald Trump apparently called Miley Cyrus to congratulate her personally after her scandalous, twerk-filled performance at the 2013 VMAs. As Cyrus explained in a recent Times interview, "I was staying at the Trump Hotel and Donald Trump literally called and said, basically, 'I know everyone’s talking about it, but I loved it.' I had no idea anyone was talking about it yet.” (Good rule of thumb -- if Donald Trump loves your performance, the rest of the world likely finds it problematic). Later in the interview, Cyrus turns to another controversial topic: Nicki Minaj’s recent criticism that the VMAs unduly favors white artists. After trying unsuccessfully to avoid weighing in (even though she clearly really wanted to weigh in), Cyrus chastised Minaj for the way she addressed the issue. As she put it, " If you do things with an open heart and you come at things with love, you would be heard and I would respect your statement. I don’t respect your statement because of the anger that came with it.” Instead of turning to the bigger issues, Cyrus claims, Minaj made it ‘about her.’ Or as she put it: "Not to sound like a bitch, but that’s like, 'Eh, I didn’t get my V.M.A.’” "If you want to make it about race, there’s a way you could do that,” she continued. “But don’t make it just about yourself. Say: 'This is the reason why I think it’s important to be nominated. There’s girls everywhere with this body type.’” When interviewer Joe Coscarelli pointed out that Minaj did in fact say that, Cyrus’ criticisms grew even more pointed:
"What I read sounded very Nicki Minaj, which, if you know Nicki Minaj is not too kind. It’s not very polite. I think there’s a way you speak to people with openness and love. You don’t have to start this pop star against pop star war. It became Nicki Minaj and Taylor in a fight, so now the story isn’t even on what you wanted it to be about. Now you’ve just given E! News 'Catfight! Taylor and Nicki Go at It.’ I know you can make it seem like, Oh I just don’t understand because I’m a white pop star. I know the statistics. I know what’s going on in the world. But to be honest, I don’t think MTV did that on purpose."Read the full interview -- which concludes with Cyrus admitting she has no idea what videos are nominated, because she doesn’t really listen to music or watch TV, cause whatever -- over at the Times.
Bobby Jindal pleads with Obama not to mention the climate crisis during Hurricane Katrina commemoration
He is running for president, commemorating the 10th anniversary of his state's worst natural disaster (man-made catastrophe) and hosting screenings of undercover anti-Planned Parenthood sting videos on his front lawn, but Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal still found time in his busy schedule to write a letter to President Obama this week, imploring him not to "politicize" the somber anniversary of Hurricane Katrina by mentioning the "radical agenda" of climate change. Warning that "partisan politics from Washington, D.C. are unwelcome in Louisiana in the best of times," Jindal warned President Obama to "carefully consider" what he says during his upcoming visit to the Crescent City in a letter released Wednesday evening. President Obama is expected to focus on the persistent racial and economic inequities that have dogged the city since before the storm. Nevertheless, Jindal found it appropriate to suggest President Obama ignore the topic of the environment all together. “Although I understand that your emphasis in New Orleans will – rightly – be on economic development, the temptation to stray into climate change politics should be resisted,” Jindal urged President Obama. “I would ask you to respect this important time of remembrance by not inserting the divisive political agenda of liberal environmental activism,” Jindal wrote. That's right. The governor of Louisiana would rather the president not talk about the environment during a tour of the long-term impact of one of the most devastating hurricanes to hit this country. Jindal dismissed any such mention as a "lecture on climate change," claiming it would "distract from the losses we have suffered." Jindal also falsely suggested that President Obama's concern about the impact of climate change amounted to an "opinion that we can legislate away hurricanes with higher taxes, business regulations and EPA power grabs." Bobby Jindal is currently polling in 14th place nationally, with 0.4 percent support from Republican primary voters according to the Huffington Post tracker. (h/t TPM) Watch the latest video at video.foxnews.com
30 people Taylor Swift hasn’t performed with (yet)
Taylor Swift has performed with a lot of people on her "1989" tour, including Justin Timberlake, Alanis Morissette, Mariska Hargitay, Fetty Wap, Lena Dunham, and the entire U.S. Women's National Soccer Team. Here are some people she hasn’t performed with: 1. Beyoncé 2. Katy Perry's cat, Kitty Purry 3. Any instrument-playing cat 4. Members of the "Friends" cast who aren't Lisa Kudrow or Matt LeBlanc 5. Taylor Schilling from "Orange is the New Black" 6. '80s pop icon Taylor Dayne 7. An actual tailor 8. Swift Boat Veterans for Truth 9. A Tupac hologram 10. Jim Parsons and the "Big Bang Theory" cast performing "Soft Kitty" 11. The “Chocolate Rain” guy 12. The cast of "I'd Like To Buy the World a Coke" 13. Crosby, Stills and Nash 14. The baby from the TV show "Dinosaurs" 15. Marina Abramovic 16. Maria Bartiromo 17. Marnie from "Girls" 18. Ja Rule 19. Gwar 20. Glenn Danzig 21. Boston Red Sox legend Wade Boggs 22. Boston Celtics legend Bob Cousy 23. Boston Bruins legend Bobby Orr 24. A Boston cream doughnut 25. Marxist political theorist Fredric Jameson 26. Flo the insurance lady 27. Camille Paglia 28. A hobnail shoe 29. A macrame sculpture of her own belly button 30. Bernie SandersTaylor Swift has performed with a lot of people on her "1989" tour, including Justin Timberlake, Alanis Morissette, Mariska Hargitay, Fetty Wap, Lena Dunham, and the entire U.S. Women's National Soccer Team. Here are some people she hasn’t performed with: 1. Beyoncé 2. Katy Perry's cat, Kitty Purry 3. Any instrument-playing cat 4. Members of the "Friends" cast who aren't Lisa Kudrow or Matt LeBlanc 5. Taylor Schilling from "Orange is the New Black" 6. '80s pop icon Taylor Dayne 7. An actual tailor 8. Swift Boat Veterans for Truth 9. A Tupac hologram 10. Jim Parsons and the "Big Bang Theory" cast performing "Soft Kitty" 11. The “Chocolate Rain” guy 12. The cast of "I'd Like To Buy the World a Coke" 13. Crosby, Stills and Nash 14. The baby from the TV show "Dinosaurs" 15. Marina Abramovic 16. Maria Bartiromo 17. Marnie from "Girls" 18. Ja Rule 19. Gwar 20. Glenn Danzig 21. Boston Red Sox legend Wade Boggs 22. Boston Celtics legend Bob Cousy 23. Boston Bruins legend Bobby Orr 24. A Boston cream doughnut 25. Marxist political theorist Fredric Jameson 26. Flo the insurance lady 27. Camille Paglia 28. A hobnail shoe 29. A macrame sculpture of her own belly button 30. Bernie Sanders
“When you lose your land, you lose part of yourself”: Watch this poignant short film about resilience in the aftermath of Katrina
Way out in Yscloskey, a town 30 miles southeast of New Orleans or, in the words of one of its oldest residents, "at the end of the world," a large, unfinished boat in a yard caught the attention of director Zack Godshall. Curious as to who the boat belonged to, Godshall knocked on the door of the house it belonged to, and that's how he met Joseph Gonzales: still very much in love with his wife of 70 years, Selina, still determined, after 30 years and despite his encroaching loss of vision, to get the boat in the water, and with no intention, 10 years after Hurricane Katrina, of living anywhere else. "The thing that they've managed to do is stick with their roots," Godshall told Salon. "Their identity is so bound up with the land, and when you lose your land, you lose your home, you sort of lose part of yourself." Katrina was by far the biggest disaster to hit Yscloskey, but to live on the Louisiana coast is to witness a slower-moving environmental catastrophe. Parts of the coast are eroding so fast, they're losing an area the size of a football field each hour; in the not-too-distant future, there may be no land to return to. "Most of us living in cities don't have that sort of connection to the environment," Godshall mused. "If you do, moving away from it is just unfathomable." Katrina swept away every house in the area but the Gonzales', and rather than move away, they built up: their home now rests on 15-foot high stilts. "The Boatman" is one of six mini-documentaries featured in New Orleans, Here & Now, a series that premiered today in commemoration of the tenth anniversary of Hurricane Katrina. You can watch the film below, and check out the entire series here. Way out in Yscloskey, a town 30 miles southeast of New Orleans or, in the words of one of its oldest residents, "at the end of the world," a large, unfinished boat in a yard caught the attention of director Zack Godshall. Curious as to who the boat belonged to, Godshall knocked on the door of the house it belonged to, and that's how he met Joseph Gonzales: still very much in love with his wife of 70 years, Selina, still determined, after 30 years and despite his encroaching loss of vision, to get the boat in the water, and with no intention, 10 years after Hurricane Katrina, of living anywhere else. "The thing that they've managed to do is stick with their roots," Godshall told Salon. "Their identity is so bound up with the land, and when you lose your land, you lose your home, you sort of lose part of yourself." Katrina was by far the biggest disaster to hit Yscloskey, but to live on the Louisiana coast is to witness a slower-moving environmental catastrophe. Parts of the coast are eroding so fast, they're losing an area the size of a football field each hour; in the not-too-distant future, there may be no land to return to. "Most of us living in cities don't have that sort of connection to the environment," Godshall mused. "If you do, moving away from it is just unfathomable." Katrina swept away every house in the area but the Gonzales', and rather than move away, they built up: their home now rests on 15-foot high stilts. "The Boatman" is one of six mini-documentaries featured in New Orleans, Here & Now, a series that premiered today in commemoration of the tenth anniversary of Hurricane Katrina. You can watch the film below, and check out the entire series here.
Are these really the best songs of the ’80s?: Picking apart Pitchfork’s fascinating, frustrating list
Best-of lists are both impossible and irresistible, and the longer and broader the span they try to include, the more imperfect and full of holes they’re likely to be. The music site Pitchfork has just demonstrated that with its list of the 200 best songs from the 1980s. It’s a stylistically wide-ranging list, with sharply written descriptions of each song, which manages to be equal parts fascinating and frustrating. Here’s how Pitchfork tees it up:
A great deal of today's music looks to the '80s for inspiration, but there are so many different ideas of what "'80s" as a descriptor can mean. Here we return to the source material. As we did for the 1960s, the 1990s, and the 2000s, as well as our 2010-2014 list, we polled our staff and contributing writers for their favorite songs of the era and tabulated the results. Every time we do one of these lists we learn something about how perceptions of decades change over time, and how the musical ideas from a given era filter through to later generations.Fair enough. Its top five selections are Prince and the Revolution’s “Purple Rain,” Michael Jackson’s “Wanna Be Startin’ Somethin’,” N.W.A’s “Straight Outta Compton,” New Order’s “Blue Monday,” and Public Enemy’s “Fight the Power.” All great, stuff (though when it comes to Jackson, “Billie Jean” seems more inventive in just about every way.) The Pitchfork staff seems split between making a best-of list (what are our favorite songs, the most enduring music) and a list of the songs that influence what we heard today. Considering the current dominance of hip hop, R&B, and electronic dance music, this is as comprehensive a list as you’re likely to see. The list excels at documenting of the years when hip hop evolved from Grandmaster Flash’s “The Message” to pop pastiche like De La Soul and word-drunk one-offs like the Beastie Boys’ “Paul’s Boutique.” The descriptions of how various kinds of ‘80s production shaped what we hear from music today – or the way the music and vocals of Yoko Ono’s “Walking on Thin Ice” echoes through contemporary bands -- shows some very good ears among the site’s staff. The nods to music outside the Anglo-American axis (a bit of Brazilian and West African) are well chosen. The shaping up of Prince as the artist of the decade makes sense, whether you look at today’s musical landscape or just look at the ‘80s in isolation. But if you reject the list’s contrarian/ Poptimist subtext – if you think that music played mostly on guitars, that comes out of country and folk and acoustic blues still matters and had a pretty good run in the ‘80s – the list is less satisfying and full of holes. Among the 200 are a few songs – usually one each – by Hüsker Dü, the Pixies, Beat Happening, Dead Kennedys, and some others. Bands from Manchester, England, are well represented, perhaps because music of that city’s scene drew from soul and funk and opened the door to the future, so New Order and Joy Division chart quite high. But among the musicians who don’t show up or barely at all are The Jam, Elvis Costello, Lucinda Williams, The Go-Betweens, Richard and Linda Thompson, Billy Bragg, Uncle Tupelo and Public Image Ltd. Stylistically, these groups are all over the map, but overall, shoegaze, singer-songwriters, alt-country, and the American alternative movement are pretty hard to find. Where are Lucinda’s "Passionate Kisses" (or “Queen of Hearts,”), Elvis Costello’s “King of America” (or “Man Out of Time” or “Five Gears in Reverse” or “I Hope You’re Happy Now”), The Jam’s “Start!” (or “Town Called Malice” or “Going Underground”), The Go-Go’s “We Got the Beat” ( or “Vacation”or "Our Lips Are Sealed") or R.E.M.’s “So. Central Rain” (or “Maps and Legends” or “Driver 8” or “Fall on Me”)? Unless I missed something, there’s only one song by the chiming quartet from Athens, GA, which ended up shaping much of the college- and alternative- and indie-rock of the ‘80s and after. The list describes “Radio Free Europe,” down there at 128, as sounding like “the invention of indie rock.” Well said – then we do we not see anything else by this band for the rest of the list? The lack of anything from the Clash’s “London Calling” LP -- a two-LP masterpiece released in 1980 in the U.S. and typically considered too retro by Poptimists -- is almost as head scratching (unless Pitchfork is disqualifying it because of its December '79 UK release.) Okay, I know -- there’s only so much room, even on a list of 200 songs. But was it really so urgent to put George Benson’s “Give Me the Night” (just about all of his jazz guitar songs are better and less overplayed), Michael McDonald’s “I Keep Forgettin (Every Time You’re Near),” Tears for Fears’ “Head Over Heels,” Hall and Oates “I Can’t Go For That,” or Phil Collins’ drum machine nightmare “In the Air Tonight”? Okay, part of this list is really great. But I just can’t forgive them the Phil Collins.Best-of lists are both impossible and irresistible, and the longer and broader the span they try to include, the more imperfect and full of holes they’re likely to be. The music site Pitchfork has just demonstrated that with its list of the 200 best songs from the 1980s. It’s a stylistically wide-ranging list, with sharply written descriptions of each song, which manages to be equal parts fascinating and frustrating. Here’s how Pitchfork tees it up:
A great deal of today's music looks to the '80s for inspiration, but there are so many different ideas of what "'80s" as a descriptor can mean. Here we return to the source material. As we did for the 1960s, the 1990s, and the 2000s, as well as our 2010-2014 list, we polled our staff and contributing writers for their favorite songs of the era and tabulated the results. Every time we do one of these lists we learn something about how perceptions of decades change over time, and how the musical ideas from a given era filter through to later generations.Fair enough. Its top five selections are Prince and the Revolution’s “Purple Rain,” Michael Jackson’s “Wanna Be Startin’ Somethin’,” N.W.A’s “Straight Outta Compton,” New Order’s “Blue Monday,” and Public Enemy’s “Fight the Power.” All great, stuff (though when it comes to Jackson, “Billie Jean” seems more inventive in just about every way.) The Pitchfork staff seems split between making a best-of list (what are our favorite songs, the most enduring music) and a list of the songs that influence what we heard today. Considering the current dominance of hip hop, R&B, and electronic dance music, this is as comprehensive a list as you’re likely to see. The list excels at documenting of the years when hip hop evolved from Grandmaster Flash’s “The Message” to pop pastiche like De La Soul and word-drunk one-offs like the Beastie Boys’ “Paul’s Boutique.” The descriptions of how various kinds of ‘80s production shaped what we hear from music today – or the way the music and vocals of Yoko Ono’s “Walking on Thin Ice” echoes through contemporary bands -- shows some very good ears among the site’s staff. The nods to music outside the Anglo-American axis (a bit of Brazilian and West African) are well chosen. The shaping up of Prince as the artist of the decade makes sense, whether you look at today’s musical landscape or just look at the ‘80s in isolation. But if you reject the list’s contrarian/ Poptimist subtext – if you think that music played mostly on guitars, that comes out of country and folk and acoustic blues still matters and had a pretty good run in the ‘80s – the list is less satisfying and full of holes. Among the 200 are a few songs – usually one each – by Hüsker Dü, the Pixies, Beat Happening, Dead Kennedys, and some others. Bands from Manchester, England, are well represented, perhaps because music of that city’s scene drew from soul and funk and opened the door to the future, so New Order and Joy Division chart quite high. But among the musicians who don’t show up or barely at all are The Jam, Elvis Costello, Lucinda Williams, The Go-Betweens, Richard and Linda Thompson, Billy Bragg, Uncle Tupelo and Public Image Ltd. Stylistically, these groups are all over the map, but overall, shoegaze, singer-songwriters, alt-country, and the American alternative movement are pretty hard to find. Where are Lucinda’s "Passionate Kisses" (or “Queen of Hearts,”), Elvis Costello’s “King of America” (or “Man Out of Time” or “Five Gears in Reverse” or “I Hope You’re Happy Now”), The Jam’s “Start!” (or “Town Called Malice” or “Going Underground”), The Go-Go’s “We Got the Beat” ( or “Vacation”or "Our Lips Are Sealed") or R.E.M.’s “So. Central Rain” (or “Maps and Legends” or “Driver 8” or “Fall on Me”)? Unless I missed something, there’s only one song by the chiming quartet from Athens, GA, which ended up shaping much of the college- and alternative- and indie-rock of the ‘80s and after. The list describes “Radio Free Europe,” down there at 128, as sounding like “the invention of indie rock.” Well said – then we do we not see anything else by this band for the rest of the list? The lack of anything from the Clash’s “London Calling” LP -- a two-LP masterpiece released in 1980 in the U.S. and typically considered too retro by Poptimists -- is almost as head scratching (unless Pitchfork is disqualifying it because of its December '79 UK release.) Okay, I know -- there’s only so much room, even on a list of 200 songs. But was it really so urgent to put George Benson’s “Give Me the Night” (just about all of his jazz guitar songs are better and less overplayed), Michael McDonald’s “I Keep Forgettin (Every Time You’re Near),” Tears for Fears’ “Head Over Heels,” Hall and Oates “I Can’t Go For That,” or Phil Collins’ drum machine nightmare “In the Air Tonight”? Okay, part of this list is really great. But I just can’t forgive them the Phil Collins.
Miley Cyrus is probably going to break the internet at Sunday’s VMAs
Long before Kim K’s booty graced the front of Paper, Miley Cyrus 'broke the internet' with her notoriously controversial 2013 VMAs performance alongside Robin Thicke, where the pop star famously emerged, Birth of Venus-style, from the stomach of giant teddy bear, and then twerked while making graphic gestures with a foam finger. Cyrus will be back to host this year’s VMAs on Sunday, and according to executive producer Garrett English, there are almost no limits to what the freewheeling pop star can and can’t do onstage. “We’re giving her pretty free rein,” he told Entertainment Weekly. “Obviously there are standards and various other things that were always a part of it, but no, [no rules]… It never comes from a place of trying to limit the range, it’s always coming from a place of trying to open up the full palate.” It’s no secret that nobody really watches the VMAs for the awards; rather, people tune in for the spectacle, and to catch the spontaneous viral moments the show’s many colorful performers are bound to elicit. By booking Cyrus as host -- not to mention giving the Video Vanguard Award to legendary provocateur Kanye West -- English seems well aware of what the people want. “One of the great things about the show is we try to create an environment where that spontaneity can happen and that creative expression rules the day,” he continues. “However that manifests is what excites us. The ethos of the show is one that even though you may know who’s performing on the show or have context around what track is being performed or [you’ve] seen them in concert and the rest of it, the VMAs is always a place where the performances break barriers and do things that are different.” Get your foam fingers -- or at very least, your tweeting fingers -- ready: the VMAs air Sunday on MTV at 9 p.m. E. T. Long before Kim K’s booty graced the front of Paper, Miley Cyrus 'broke the internet' with her notoriously controversial 2013 VMAs performance alongside Robin Thicke, where the pop star famously emerged, Birth of Venus-style, from the stomach of giant teddy bear, and then twerked while making graphic gestures with a foam finger. Cyrus will be back to host this year’s VMAs on Sunday, and according to executive producer Garrett English, there are almost no limits to what the freewheeling pop star can and can’t do onstage. “We’re giving her pretty free rein,” he told Entertainment Weekly. “Obviously there are standards and various other things that were always a part of it, but no, [no rules]… It never comes from a place of trying to limit the range, it’s always coming from a place of trying to open up the full palate.” It’s no secret that nobody really watches the VMAs for the awards; rather, people tune in for the spectacle, and to catch the spontaneous viral moments the show’s many colorful performers are bound to elicit. By booking Cyrus as host -- not to mention giving the Video Vanguard Award to legendary provocateur Kanye West -- English seems well aware of what the people want. “One of the great things about the show is we try to create an environment where that spontaneity can happen and that creative expression rules the day,” he continues. “However that manifests is what excites us. The ethos of the show is one that even though you may know who’s performing on the show or have context around what track is being performed or [you’ve] seen them in concert and the rest of it, the VMAs is always a place where the performances break barriers and do things that are different.” Get your foam fingers -- or at very least, your tweeting fingers -- ready: the VMAs air Sunday on MTV at 9 p.m. E. T. Long before Kim K’s booty graced the front of Paper, Miley Cyrus 'broke the internet' with her notoriously controversial 2013 VMAs performance alongside Robin Thicke, where the pop star famously emerged, Birth of Venus-style, from the stomach of giant teddy bear, and then twerked while making graphic gestures with a foam finger. Cyrus will be back to host this year’s VMAs on Sunday, and according to executive producer Garrett English, there are almost no limits to what the freewheeling pop star can and can’t do onstage. “We’re giving her pretty free rein,” he told Entertainment Weekly. “Obviously there are standards and various other things that were always a part of it, but no, [no rules]… It never comes from a place of trying to limit the range, it’s always coming from a place of trying to open up the full palate.” It’s no secret that nobody really watches the VMAs for the awards; rather, people tune in for the spectacle, and to catch the spontaneous viral moments the show’s many colorful performers are bound to elicit. By booking Cyrus as host -- not to mention giving the Video Vanguard Award to legendary provocateur Kanye West -- English seems well aware of what the people want. “One of the great things about the show is we try to create an environment where that spontaneity can happen and that creative expression rules the day,” he continues. “However that manifests is what excites us. The ethos of the show is one that even though you may know who’s performing on the show or have context around what track is being performed or [you’ve] seen them in concert and the rest of it, the VMAs is always a place where the performances break barriers and do things that are different.” Get your foam fingers -- or at very least, your tweeting fingers -- ready: the VMAs air Sunday on MTV at 9 p.m. E. T.
Watch Donald Trump refuse to name any verses in his “favorite” book, The Bible
Donald Trump has recently grown fond of telling supporters on the campaign trail that his favorite book is the Bible -- followed by his business tome "The Art of the Deal." But when asked about his favorite Bible verse, the Republican presidential frontrunner declines to get specific. "I go to church and I love God and I love my church," Trump boldly pronounced but in an interview on Bloomberg TV's "With All Due Respect." But he said the Bible was too personal to him to "get into specifics." "The Bible means a lot to me, but I don't want to get into specifics," Trump told Bloomberg’s Mark Halperin, refusing to list one or two favorite verses. Pressed again, Trump said the Bible was simply too personal to discuss publicly: "I wouldn't want to get into it because to me that's very personal. You know, when I talk about the Bible, it's very personal, so I don't want to get into verses." John Heilemann, searching for a workaround, then asked Trump if he considered himself "an Old Testament guy or a New Testament guy." "Probably equal," Trump answered matter-of-factly, explaining his inability to select just one: "The whole Bible is just incredible.” Trump, a Presbyterian who says he regularly attends services at a 5th Avenue church, recently threatened to “scare the Pope” away from critiquing capitalism by telling the pontiff that "ISIS wants to go in and take over the Vatican." Trump has also said he can't remember the last time he sought the almighty's forgiveness, dismissing Holy Communion in the process. "When I drink my little wine -- which is about the only wine I drink -- and have my little cracker, I guess that is a form of asking for forgiveness, and I do that as often as possible because I feel cleansed," Trump told an audience at the conservative Family Leadership Summtt in Iowa last month. Despite his unorthodox approach to discussing his faith, Trump dominates his Republican opponents in the most recent polls of the early voting states, Iowa and South Carolina, both states with a large amount of evangelical voters. Watch video of Trump's exchange with Halperin and Heilemann below: Donald Trump has recently grown fond of telling supporters on the campaign trail that his favorite book is the Bible -- followed by his business tome "The Art of the Deal." But when asked about his favorite Bible verse, the Republican presidential frontrunner declines to get specific. "I go to church and I love God and I love my church," Trump boldly pronounced but in an interview on Bloomberg TV's "With All Due Respect." But he said the Bible was too personal to him to "get into specifics." "The Bible means a lot to me, but I don't want to get into specifics," Trump told Bloomberg’s Mark Halperin, refusing to list one or two favorite verses. Pressed again, Trump said the Bible was simply too personal to discuss publicly: "I wouldn't want to get into it because to me that's very personal. You know, when I talk about the Bible, it's very personal, so I don't want to get into verses." John Heilemann, searching for a workaround, then asked Trump if he considered himself "an Old Testament guy or a New Testament guy." "Probably equal," Trump answered matter-of-factly, explaining his inability to select just one: "The whole Bible is just incredible.” Trump, a Presbyterian who says he regularly attends services at a 5th Avenue church, recently threatened to “scare the Pope” away from critiquing capitalism by telling the pontiff that "ISIS wants to go in and take over the Vatican." Trump has also said he can't remember the last time he sought the almighty's forgiveness, dismissing Holy Communion in the process. "When I drink my little wine -- which is about the only wine I drink -- and have my little cracker, I guess that is a form of asking for forgiveness, and I do that as often as possible because I feel cleansed," Trump told an audience at the conservative Family Leadership Summtt in Iowa last month. Despite his unorthodox approach to discussing his faith, Trump dominates his Republican opponents in the most recent polls of the early voting states, Iowa and South Carolina, both states with a large amount of evangelical voters. Watch video of Trump's exchange with Halperin and Heilemann below: Donald Trump has recently grown fond of telling supporters on the campaign trail that his favorite book is the Bible -- followed by his business tome "The Art of the Deal." But when asked about his favorite Bible verse, the Republican presidential frontrunner declines to get specific. "I go to church and I love God and I love my church," Trump boldly pronounced but in an interview on Bloomberg TV's "With All Due Respect." But he said the Bible was too personal to him to "get into specifics." "The Bible means a lot to me, but I don't want to get into specifics," Trump told Bloomberg’s Mark Halperin, refusing to list one or two favorite verses. Pressed again, Trump said the Bible was simply too personal to discuss publicly: "I wouldn't want to get into it because to me that's very personal. You know, when I talk about the Bible, it's very personal, so I don't want to get into verses." John Heilemann, searching for a workaround, then asked Trump if he considered himself "an Old Testament guy or a New Testament guy." "Probably equal," Trump answered matter-of-factly, explaining his inability to select just one: "The whole Bible is just incredible.” Trump, a Presbyterian who says he regularly attends services at a 5th Avenue church, recently threatened to “scare the Pope” away from critiquing capitalism by telling the pontiff that "ISIS wants to go in and take over the Vatican." Trump has also said he can't remember the last time he sought the almighty's forgiveness, dismissing Holy Communion in the process. "When I drink my little wine -- which is about the only wine I drink -- and have my little cracker, I guess that is a form of asking for forgiveness, and I do that as often as possible because I feel cleansed," Trump told an audience at the conservative Family Leadership Summtt in Iowa last month. Despite his unorthodox approach to discussing his faith, Trump dominates his Republican opponents in the most recent polls of the early voting states, Iowa and South Carolina, both states with a large amount of evangelical voters. Watch video of Trump's exchange with Halperin and Heilemann below:
Stephen Colbert reveals the truth about his “Colbert Report” character: “I had to actually leave — I had to change”
In TIME's cover story this week, a profile of soon-to-be "Late Show" host Stephen Colbert, we learn a great deal. For example: As a child, Colbert said he was "occasionally reckless," destroying cars and chandeliers and anything placed in front of him. He chose the pronunciation of his last name with the emphasis on the second syllable because he thought it had more of a "worldly ring" to it. He has a deep-seated fear that the public perceives him as a politician (and a comedian, secondarily). As it goes with any print publication, that comprehensive profile had to be whittled down quite a bit. Today, TIME released the extended version of the interview which includes an interesting look into Colbert's headspace as he neared the end of "The Colbert Report." As we already knew, Colbert was more than ready to sign off from the show. Expanding on this point for TIME, Colbert said that "it became very hard to watch punditry of any kind, of whatever political stripe." "I wouldn’t want anybody to mistake my comedy for engagement in punditry itself," Colbert said. "And to change that expectation from an audience, or to change that need for me to be steeped in cable news and punditry, I had to actually leave. I had to change." Keeping up with the character, Colbert said, also quickly became a tedious task. He was tired of "not letting people in." "Toward the end of the last show, it was an act of discipline for me to continue to do the character," he said. "The discipline was not even just keeping the character’s point of view in mind or his agenda or a bible of his views, but there was also a need to not let people in, not let people see back stage—not necessarily know who I am so that the character can be the strongest suggestion in their mind when I do the show. If I let them know too much about me or our process, then I would be picking the character’s chicken. I don’t want to put so much light behind that particular stained glass or else he would fade completely." Later, Colbert explained that, contrary to popular belief, he did break character many times on the show. The character-breaks were just edited out. "People said, 'Oh, you never broke” or “You rarely broke.' That’s because we always took it out, because part of the character was he wasn’t a f—up," he said. "He was absolutely always on point. Win. Get over. Stay sharp. That was his attitude all the time, and we had to reflect that in the production of the show. None of that is necessary anymore. Now I can be a comedian." Read the extended cover story via TIME here.In TIME's cover story this week, a profile of soon-to-be "Late Show" host Stephen Colbert, we learn a great deal. For example: As a child, Colbert said he was "occasionally reckless," destroying cars and chandeliers and anything placed in front of him. He chose the pronunciation of his last name with the emphasis on the second syllable because he thought it had more of a "worldly ring" to it. He has a deep-seated fear that the public perceives him as a politician (and a comedian, secondarily). As it goes with any print publication, that comprehensive profile had to be whittled down quite a bit. Today, TIME released the extended version of the interview which includes an interesting look into Colbert's headspace as he neared the end of "The Colbert Report." As we already knew, Colbert was more than ready to sign off from the show. Expanding on this point for TIME, Colbert said that "it became very hard to watch punditry of any kind, of whatever political stripe." "I wouldn’t want anybody to mistake my comedy for engagement in punditry itself," Colbert said. "And to change that expectation from an audience, or to change that need for me to be steeped in cable news and punditry, I had to actually leave. I had to change." Keeping up with the character, Colbert said, also quickly became a tedious task. He was tired of "not letting people in." "Toward the end of the last show, it was an act of discipline for me to continue to do the character," he said. "The discipline was not even just keeping the character’s point of view in mind or his agenda or a bible of his views, but there was also a need to not let people in, not let people see back stage—not necessarily know who I am so that the character can be the strongest suggestion in their mind when I do the show. If I let them know too much about me or our process, then I would be picking the character’s chicken. I don’t want to put so much light behind that particular stained glass or else he would fade completely." Later, Colbert explained that, contrary to popular belief, he did break character many times on the show. The character-breaks were just edited out. "People said, 'Oh, you never broke” or “You rarely broke.' That’s because we always took it out, because part of the character was he wasn’t a f—up," he said. "He was absolutely always on point. Win. Get over. Stay sharp. That was his attitude all the time, and we had to reflect that in the production of the show. None of that is necessary anymore. Now I can be a comedian." Read the extended cover story via TIME here.
